-
Surgery Nov 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to give an overview on the postoperative outcome after a minimally invasive (ie, laparoscopic and robot-assisted) central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy with a specific emphasis on the postoperative pancreatic fistula. For benign and low-grade malignant lesions in the pancreatic neck and body, central pancreatectomy may be an alternative to distal pancreatectomy. Exocrine and endocrine insufficiency occur less often after central pancreatectomy, but the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula is higher.
METHODS
An electronic search was performed for studies on elective minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, which reported on major morbidity and postoperative pancreatic fistula in PubMed, Cochrane Register, Embase, and Google Scholar until June 1, 2021. A review protocol was developed a priori and registered in PROSPERO as CRD42021259738. A meta-regression was performed by using a random effects model.
RESULTS
Overall, 41 studies were included involving 1,004 patients, consisting of 158 laparoscopic minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, 80 robot-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomies, and 766 open central pancreatectomies. The overall rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula was 14%, major morbidity 14%, and 30-day mortality 1%. The rates of postoperative pancreatic fistula (17% vs 24%, P = .194), major morbidity (17% vs 14%, P = .672), and new-onset diabetes (3% vs 6%, P = .353) did not differ significantly between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy, respectively. Minimally invasive central pancreatectomy was associated with significantly fewer blood transfusions, less exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, and fewer readmissions compared with open central pancreatectomy. A meta-regression was performed with a random effects model between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy and open central pancreatectomy and showed no significant difference for postoperative pancreatic fistula (random effects model 0.16 [0.10; 0.24] with P = .789), major morbidity (random effects model 0.20 [0.15; 0.25] with P = .410), and new-onset diabetes mellitus (random effects model 0.04 [0.02; 0.07] with P = .651).
CONCLUSION
In selected patients and in experienced hands, minimally invasive central pancreatectomy is a safe alternative to open central pancreatectomy for benign and low-grade malignant lesions of the neck and body. Ideally, further research should confirm this with the main focus on postoperative pancreatic fistula and endocrine and exocrine insufficiency.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35987787
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2022.06.024 -
Fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2018Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most frequent and potentially life-threatening complications following pancreatic resections. Fibrin sealants are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Postoperative pancreatic fistula is one of the most frequent and potentially life-threatening complications following pancreatic resections. Fibrin sealants are introduced to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula by some surgeons. However, the use of fibrin sealants during pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the safety, effectiveness, and potential adverse effects of fibrin sealants for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula following pancreatic surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched trial registers and the following biomedical databases: the Cochrane Library (2018, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1946 to 12 April 2018), Embase (1980 to 12 April 2018), Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 12 April 2018), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) (1978 to 12 April 2018).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomized controlled trials that compared fibrin sealant (fibrin glue or fibrin sealant patch) versus control (no fibrin sealant or placebo) in people undergoing pancreatic surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We performed the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (or a Peto odds ratio (OR) for very rare outcomes), and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 studies involving 1462 participants in the review.Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic stump closure reinforcement after distal pancreatectomyWe included seven studies involving 860 participants: 428 were randomized to the fibrin sealant group and 432 to the control group after distal pancreatectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative pancreatic fistula (fibrin sealant 19.3%; control 20.1%; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35; 755 participants; four studies; low-quality evidence). Fibrin sealants may also lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (0.3% versus 0.5%; Peto OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.03; 804 participants; six studies; low-quality evidence), or overall postoperative morbidity (28.5% versus 23.2%; RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.58; 646 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce reoperation rate (2.0% versus 3.8%; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.71; 376 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). There is probably little or no difference in length of hospital stay between the groups (12.1 days versus 11.4 days; MD 0.32 days, 95% CI -1.06 to 1.70; 755 participants; four studies; moderate-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness.Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic anastomosis reinforcement after pancreaticoduodenectomyWe included three studies involving 251 participants: 115 were randomized to the fibrin sealant group and 136 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula (1.6% versus 6.2%; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.01 to 5.06; 57 participants; one study; very low-quality evidence). Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (0.1% versus 0.7%; Peto OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.00 to 7.76; 251 participants; three studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (12.8 days versus 14.8 days; MD -1.58 days, 95% CI -3.96 to 0.81; 181 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce overall postoperative morbidity (33.7% versus 34.7%; RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.45; 181 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or reoperation rate (7.6% versus 9.2%; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.11; 181 participants; two studies, very low-quality evidence). The studies did not report serious adverse events, quality of life, or cost effectiveness.Application of fibrin sealants to pancreatic duct occlusion after pancreaticoduodenectomyWe included two studies involving 351 participants: 188 were randomized to the fibrin sealant group and 163 to the control group after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Fibrin sealants may lead to little or no difference in postoperative mortality (8.4% versus 6.1%; Peto OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.63 to 3.13; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence) or length of hospital stay (17.0 days versus 16.5 days; MD 0.58 days, 95% CI -5.74 to 6.89; 351 participants; two studies; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether fibrin sealants reduce overall postoperative morbidity (32.0% versus 27.6%; RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.02; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or reoperation rate (13.6% versus 16.0%; RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.41; 351 participants; two studies; very low-quality evidence). Serious adverse events were reported in one study: more participants developed diabetes mellitus when fibrin sealants were applied to pancreatic duct occlusion, both at three months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 10.8% control group; 29 participants versus 9 participants) and 12 months' follow-up (33.7% fibrin sealant group versus 14.5% control group; 29 participants versus 12 participants). The studies did not report postoperative pancreatic fistula, quality of life, or cost effectiveness.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based on the current available evidence, fibrin sealants may have little or no effect on postoperative pancreatic fistula in people undergoing distal pancreatectomy. The effects of fibrin sealants on the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula are uncertain in people undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Topics: Fibrin Tissue Adhesive; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreas; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reoperation; Tissue Adhesives
PubMed: 29934987
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009621.pub3 -
International Journal of Surgery... Oct 2015This study to evaluate the utility of drain fluid amylase as a predictor of PF in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery based on the International Study Group of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
This study to evaluate the utility of drain fluid amylase as a predictor of PF in patients undergoing pancreatic surgery based on the International Study Group of Pancreatic Fistula definitions of pancreatic fistula.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was carried out using Pubmed (Medline), Embase, Web of science and Cochrane database for clinical trials, which studied DFA as a diagnostic marker for pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery. Sensitivity, specificity and the diagnostic odds ratios with 95% confidence interval were calculated for each study. Summary receiver-operating curves were conducted and the area under the curve was evaluated.
RESULTS
A total of 10 studies were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of drain fluid amylase Day 1 for the diagnosis of postoperative pancreatic fistula were 81% and 87%, respectively (area under the curve was 0.897, diagnostic odds ratios was 16.83 and 95%CI was 12.66-22.36), the pooled sensitivity and specificity of drain fluid amylase Day 3 for the diagnosis of postoperative pancreatic fistula were 56% and 79%, respectively (area under the curve was 0.668, diagnostic odds ratios was 3.26 and 95%CI was 1.83-5.82) CONCLUSIONS: The drain fluid amylase Day 1, instead of drain fluid amylase Day 3, may be a useful criterion for the early identification of postoperative pancreatic fistula, and a value of drain fluid amylase Day 1 over than 1300 U/L was a risk factor of pancreatic fistula. And the diagnostic accuracy and the proposed cut-off levels of drain fluid amylase Day 1 in predicting the postoperative pancreatic fistula will have to be validated by multicenter prospective studies.
Topics: Amylases; Drainage; Humans; Odds Ratio; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Risk Factors; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 26211439
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.07.007 -
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology Oct 2016Pancreas surgery has developed into a fairly safe procedure in terms of mortality, but is still hampered by considerable morbidity. Among the most frequent and dreaded... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreas surgery has developed into a fairly safe procedure in terms of mortality, but is still hampered by considerable morbidity. Among the most frequent and dreaded complications are the development of a post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The prediction and prevention of POPF remains an area of debate with several questions yet to be firmly addressed with solid answers.
METHODS
A systematic review of systematic reviews/meta-analyses and randomized trials in the English literature (PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane library, EMBASE) covering January 2005 to December 2015 on risk factors and preventive strategies for POPF.
RESULTS
A total of 49 systematic reviews and meta-analyses over the past decade discussed patient, surgeon, pancreatic disease and intraoperative related factors of POPF. Non-modifiable factors (age, BMI, comorbidity) and pathology (histotype, gland texture, duct size) that indicates surgery are associated with POPF risk. Consideration of anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly modify the risk of fistula. Sealant products appear to have no effect. Perioperative bleeding and transfusion enhance risk, but is modifiable by focus on technique and training. Drains may not prevent fistulae, but may help in early detection. Early drain-amylase may aid in detection. Predictive scores lack uniform validation, but may have a role in patient information if reliable pre-operative risk factors can be obtained.
CONCLUSIONS
Development of POPF occurs through several demonstrated risk factors. Anastomotic technique and use of somatostatin-analogs may slightly decrease risk. Drains may aid in early detection of leaks, but do not prevent POPF.
Topics: Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Drainage; Humans; Morbidity; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula; Postoperative Complications; Predictive Value of Tests; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27216233
DOI: 10.3109/00365521.2016.1169317 -
International Journal of Surgery... May 2018Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS) has been widely used in the treatment of benign and low-grade pancreatic diseases. It is necessary to expand the current knowledge... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery (LPS) has been widely used in the treatment of benign and low-grade pancreatic diseases. It is necessary to expand the current knowledge on the feasibility and safety of LPS for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) by systematic reviewing the published studies and analyzing them by meta-analysis.
METHODS
Original articles compared LPS with open pancreatic surgery (OPS) for PDAC, published from January 1994 to August 2017 were searched in medical databases. Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), morbidity, mortality, operation time, blood loss, transfusion, hospital stay, retrieved lymph nodes (RLNs), and survival outcomes were compared.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies with a total of 13174 patients (1705 in LPS and 11469 in OPS) were included for the meta-analysis. LPS showed less morbidity (RR = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.66-0.92, P < .01), blood loss (WMD = -298.05 ml, 95% CI, -482.98∼-113.12 ml; P < .01), shorter hospital stay (WMD = -2.86, 95%CI, -3.85∼-1.87; P < .01), more RLNs (WMD = 1.47, 95%CI: 0.15-2.78; P = .03) and comparable POPF (RR = 1.12, 95%CI: 0.82-1.53, P = .50), operation time (WMD = 22.23 min; 95%CI: -19.56-64.01, P = .30), and 5-year overall survival (HR = 0.92, 95%CI: 0.80-1.06; P = .23) compared to OPS.
CONCLUSION
LPS can be performed safely in carefully selected patients with PADC and would improve the surgical outcomes. Considering the limitation of study design, the conclusions should be interpret cautiously and warrant to be confirmed by randomized controlled studies.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Blood Transfusion; Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29337177
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.12.032 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Nov 2022Background and Aims: Recent single-center retrospective studies have focused on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients, and compared the outcomes... (Review)
Review
Background and Aims: Recent single-center retrospective studies have focused on laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients, and compared the outcomes between the laparoscopic and open approaches. Our study aimed to determine the outcomes of LPD in the elderly patients, by performing a systematic review and a meta-analysis of relevant studies. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was conducted utilizing the Embase, Medline, PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases to identify all studies that compared laparoscopic vs. open approach for pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Results: Five retrospective studies were included in the final analysis. Overall, 90-day mortality rates were significantly decreased after LPD in elderly patients compared with open approaches (RR = 0.56; 95%CI: 0.32−0.96; p = 0.037, I2 = 0%). The laparoscopic approach had similar mortality rate at 30-day, readmission rate in hospital, Clavien−Dindo complications, pancreatic fistula grade B/C, complete resection rate, reoperation for complications and blood loss as the open approach. Additionally, comparing with younger patients (<70 years old), no significant differences were seen in elderly cohort patients regarding mortality rate at 90 days, readmission rate to hospital, and complication rate. Conclusions: Based on our meta-analysis, we identify that LPD in elderly is a safe procedure, with significantly lower 90-day mortality rates when compared with the open approach. Our results should be considered with caution, considering the retrospective analyses of the included studies; larger prospective studies are required.
PubMed: 36362961
DOI: 10.3390/life12111810 -
Digestive Surgery 2016Different scoring systems to predict the occurrence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy have been described, but the considered risk... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/AIM
Different scoring systems to predict the occurrence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) after pancreatoduodenectomy have been described, but the considered risk factors often suffer subjective scaling. The aim of this review is to evaluate and compare all published risk metrics predictive of POPF.
METHODS
All existing scores were retrieved by literature web search. Inclusion criteria were ISGPF classification of POPF and the development of a risk score metric.
RESULTS
From a total of 286 publications, 10 studies were selected. Most of them were retrospective and single center. The models considered a median number of 3 items (range from 2 to 5); in 5 of 10 trials only pre or intraoperative variables were included. The median number of patients/study was 186 (IQR 111.1-229.0). External validation was performed in 6 of 10 studies. The most recurrent items were abdominal fat (4/10), main pancreatic duct diameter (in 4/10), and pancreatic texture (3/10).
CONCLUSION
POPF risk estimation should be easy, accurate, and objective. It should consider preoperative patient-related and gland-related features, and intraoperative events. None of the published systems completely adhere to these principles. Large heterogeneous multicentric validations should be endorsed, to account for the case-mix and evaluate the reproducibility of each scoring system.
Topics: Abdominal Fat; Humans; Pancreatic Ducts; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Predictive Value of Tests; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27160158
DOI: 10.1159/000445068 -
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery :... Nov 2023Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic benign, cystic, and neuroendocrine neoplasms are increasingly detected and recommended for surgical treatment. In multiorgan resection pancreatoduodenectomy or parenchyma-sparing, local extirpation is a challenge for decision-making regarding surgery-related early and late postoperative morbidity.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Libraries were searched for studies reporting early surgery-related complications following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and duodenum-preserving total (DPPHRt) or partial (DPPHRp) pancreatic head resection for benign tumors. Thirty-four cohort studies comprising data from 1099 patients were analyzed. In total, 654 patients underwent DPPHR and 445 patients PD for benign tumors. This review and meta-analysis does not need ethical approval.
RESULTS
Comparing DPPHRt and PD, the need for blood transfusion (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10-0.41, p<0.01), re-intervention for serious surgery-related complications (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.31-0.73, p<0.001), and re-operation for severe complications (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26-0.95, p=0.04) were significantly less frequent following DPPHRt. Pancreatic fistula B+C (19.0 to 15.3%, p=0.99) and biliary fistula (6.3 to 4.3%; p=0.33) were in the same range following PD and DPPHRt. In-hospital mortality after DPPHRt was one of 350 patients (0.28%) and after PD eight of 445 patients (1.79%) (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.10-1.09, p=0.07). Following DPPHRp, there was no mortality among the 192 patients.
CONCLUSION
DPPHR for benign pancreatic tumors is associated with significantly fewer surgery-related, serious, and severe postoperative complications and lower in-hospital mortality compared to PD. Tailored use of DPPHRt or DPPHRp contributes to a reduction of surgery-related complications. DPPHR has the potential to replace PD for benign tumors and premalignant cystic and neuroendocrine neoplasms of the pancreatic head.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatectomy; Pancreas; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Duodenum; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Pancreatic Cyst
PubMed: 37670106
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-023-05789-4 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jan 2023: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the most challenging complications after pancreatic resections, associated with prolonged hospital stay and high... (Review)
Review
: Postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is one of the most challenging complications after pancreatic resections, associated with prolonged hospital stay and high mortality. Early identification of pancreatic fistula is necessary for the treatment to be effective. Several prognostic factors have been identified, although it is unclear which one is the most crucial. Some studies show that post-pancreatectomy hypophosphatemia may be associated with the development of POPF. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether postoperative hypophosphatemia can be used as a prognostic factor for postoperative pancreatic fistula. : The systematic literature review was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations (PRISMA) and was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to the 31st of January 2022 for studies analyzing postoperative hypophosphatemia as a prognostic factor for POPF. Data including study characteristics, patient characteristics, operation type, definitions of postoperative hypophosphatemia and postoperative pancreatic fistula were extracted. : Initially, 149 articles were retrieved. After screening and final assessment, 3 retrospective studies with 2893 patients were included in this review. An association between postoperative hypophosphatemia and POPF was found in all included studies. Patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy were more likely to develop severe hypophosphatemia compared to patients undergoing proximal pancreatectomy. Serum phosphate levels on postoperative day 4 (POD 4) and postoperative day 5 (POD 5) remained significantly lower in patients who developed leak-related complications showing a slower recovery of hypophosphatemia from postoperative day 3 (POD 3) through postoperative day 7 (POD 7). Moreover, body mass index (BMI) higher than 30 kg/m, soft pancreatic tissue, abnormal white blood cell count on postoperative day 3 (POD 3), and shorter surgery time were associated with leak-related complications (LRC) and lower phosphate levels. : Early postoperative hypophosphatemia might be used as a prognostic biomarker for early identification of postoperative pancreatic fistula. However, more studies are needed to better identify significant cut-off levels of postoperative hypophosphatemia and development of hypophosphatemia in the postoperative period.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Fistula; Prognosis; Retrospective Studies; Hypophosphatemia; Postoperative Complications; Phosphates; Postoperative Period; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36837475
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59020274 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Nov 2015Pancreatic fistula is a potentially life-threatening complication after a pancreatic resection. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the role of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic fistula is a potentially life-threatening complication after a pancreatic resection. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the role of matrix-bound sealants after a pancreatic resection in terms of preventing or ameliorating the course of a post-operative pancreatic fistula.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in the literature from May 2005 to April 2015. Included were clinical studies using matrix-bound sealants after a pancreatic resection, reporting a post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) according to the International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula classification, in which grade B and C fistulae were considered clinically relevant.
RESULTS
Two were studies on patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (sealants n = 67, controls n = 27) and four studies on a distal pancreatectomy (sealants n = 258, controls n = 178). After a pancreatoduodenectomy, 13% of patients treated with sealants versus 11% of patients without sealants developed a POPF (P = 0.76), of which 4% versus 4% were clinically relevant (P = 0.87). After a distal pancreatectomy, 42% of patients treated with sealants versus 52% of patients without sealants developed a POPF (P = 0.03). Of these, 9% versus 12% were clinically relevant (P = 0.19).
CONCLUSIONS
The present data do not support the routine use of matrix-bound sealants after a pancreatic resection, as there was no effect on clinically relevant POPF. Larger, well-designed studies are needed to determine the efficacy of sealants in preventing POPF after a pancreatoduodenectomy.
Topics: Humans; Intraoperative Period; Pancreatectomy; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Postoperative Complications; Tissue Adhesives
PubMed: 26292846
DOI: 10.1111/hpb.12472